Experimental Investigation of the Shear Behavior of EPS Geofoam

Original Paper
  • 99 Downloads

Abstract

Geofoam has been used in a wide range of geotechnical engineering projects since 1960s; either as lightweight fill material (e.g. embankments and bridge approaches) or as compressible inclusion (e.g. retaining walls and culverts). In most of these projects, geofoam is installed either in direct contact with other geofoam blocks or other construction material. Successful design of these composite systems requires a good understanding of both the compression and shear behavior of the geofoam blocks as well as the shear strength of the interface. In this study, an attempt has been made to measure the shear strength parameters of expanded polystyrene (EPS) geofoam blocks of different densities as well as the interface strength parameters as these blocks interact with sand as well as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) material. A series of direct shear tests has been carried out on geofoam samples of three different densities, namely, 15, 22 and 35 kg/m3. Shear test results on geofoam monoblocks showed that the increase in density results in an increase in the material cohesion, which is associated with a decrease in the internal friction angle. Most of the interface resistance was found to develop at small displacements. For geofoam–PVC interface, both the adhesion and angle of interface friction slightly increased with the increase in geofoam density. The measured geofoam–sand interface strength revealed a consistent increase in the angle of interface friction as the density of geofoam material increased. These experimental results can be used to guide engineers in estimating the interface parameters needed for both analytical and numerical analyses involving soil–EPS–structure interaction.

Keywords

EPS geofoam Direct shear tests Friction angle Interface strength Adhesion 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by McGill University and the University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan. The assistance of Mr. John Bartczak and the in-kind support from Plasti-Fab Inc. are highly appreciated.

References

  1. 1.
    BASF Corp (1997) Styropor technical information. BASF Corp., LudwigshafenGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stark TD, Arellano D, Horvath JS, Leshchinsky D (2004) Geofoam applications in the design and construction of highway embankments. NCHRP Web Doc 65:24Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Horvath J (1997) The compressible inclusion function of EPS geofoam. Geotext Geomembr 15(1):77–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Meguid M, Ahmed M, Hussein M, Omeman Z (2017) Earth pressure distribution on a rigid box covered with U-shaped geofoam wrap. Int J Geosynthet Ground Eng 3(2):11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meguid M, Hussein M, Ahmed M, Omeman Z, Whalen J (2017) Investigation of soil-geosynthetic-structure interaction associated with induced trench installation. Geotext Geomembr 45(4):320–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bathurst R, Zarnani S, Gaskin A (2007) Shaking table testing of geofoam seismic buffers. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 27(4):324–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wagner G (1986) A senior report on expanded polystyrene as lightweight embankment material. University of New Brunswick, FrederictonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    NRRL (1992) Expanded polystyrene used in road embankments. NRRL, OsloGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sanders R, Seedhouse R (1994) The use of polystyrene for embankment construction. TRL contractor report (CR 356)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kuroda S, Hotta H, Yamazaki F (1996) Simulation of shaking table test for EPS embankment model by distinct element method. In: Proceedings of international symposium on EPS (expanded poly-styrol) construction method, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sheeley M, Negussey D (2000) An investigation of geofoam interface strength behavior. Geotech Spec Publ 301:292–303.  https://doi.org/10.1061/40552(301)23 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barrett JC, Valsangkar AJ (2009) Effectiveness of connectors in geofoam block construction. Geotext Geomembr 27(3):211–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Abdelrahman G, Duttine A, Tatsuoka F (2008) Interface friction properties of EPS geofoam blocks from direct shear tests. In: Characterization and behavior of interfaces: proceedings of research symposium on characterization and behavior of interfaces, Atlanta, 2010, IOS Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    AbdelSalam S, Azzam S (2016) Reduction of lateral pressures on retaining walls using geofoam inclusion. Geosynth Int 23(6):395–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McAffee R (1993) Geofoam as lightweight embankment fill. Department of Geological Engineering Senior Report, University of New Brunswick, FrederictonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nomaguchi A (1996) Studies on earthquake resisting performance of EPS embankment. In: Proceedings of international symposium on EPS (expanded poly-styrol) construction method, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Negussey D, Anasthas N, Srirajan S (2001) Interface friction properties of EPS geofoam. In: Proceedings of the EPS geofoam, 3rd international conference, Salt Lake CityGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Atmatzidis DK, Missirlis EG, Theodorakopoulos EB (2001) Shear resistance on EPS geofoam block surfaces. In: 3rd Annual conference on EPS geofoam 2001, Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory, University of Patras, PatrasGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chrysikos D, Atmatzidis D, Missirlis E (2006) EPS geofoam surface shear resistance. In: 8th IGS, Yokohama, pp 1651–1654Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Neto JA, Bueno B (2012) Laboratory research on EPS blocks used in geotechnical engineering. Soils Rock 35(2):169–180Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Padade A, Mandal J (2014) Interface strength behavior of expanded polystyrene EPS geofoam. Int J Geotech Eng 8(1):66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Özer AT, Akay O (2015) Interface shear strength characteristics of interlocked EPS-Block Geofoam. J Mater Civ Eng 28(4):04015156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Miki G (1996) Ten year history of EPS method in Japan and its future challenges. In: Proceeding of the international symposium on EPS construction method, Tokyo, pp 394–411Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Negussey D (1997) Properties and applications of geofoam, society of the plastics industry. Inc Foamed Polystyrene Alliance, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xenaki V, Athanasopoulos G (2001) Experimental investigation of the interaction mechanism at the EPS geofoam-sand interface by direct shear testing. Geosynth Int 8(6):471–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Padade A, Mandal J (2012) Direct shear test on expanded polystyrene (EPS) geofoam. In: Proceedings of the 5th European Geosynthetic Congress, International Geosynthetics Society, JupiterGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xiao M (2015) Geotechnical engineering design. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ASTM D421-85 (2007) Standard practice for dry preparation of soil samples for particle-size analysis and determination of soil constants. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    ASTM D422-63 (2007) Standard test method for particle-size analysis of soils. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    ASTM D3080-11 (2011) Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under consolidated drained conditions. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    ASTM D5321-17 (2017) Standard test method for determining the shear strength of soil-geosynthetic and geosynthetic-geosynthetic interfaces by direct Shear. ASTM International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Civil Engineering and Applied MechanicsMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Civil Engineering DepartmentUniversity of Engineering and TechnologyLahorePakistan

Personalised recommendations